[aboringusername]

I don't actually see this as a problem, and instead it's a PSA everyone needs to internalize:

If you put data onto a networked device it may be sent to some place else.

If you don't want your data being shared:

Use a device that does not have any networking capability (both hardware and software wise)

Use a pen and paper, you can shred and destroy as you see fit.

If you're using an application on a mobile device with mobile data/wifi, the chances are, your data is being uploaded.

[elsjaako]

There are four open source period tracking apps on F-droid. I didn't do a full investigation of the source code, but unless your data is being uploaded outside the app (e.g. for backups), I feel safe assuming it will stay local only.

[reorder9695]

It sounds like the real solution to this is to be able to control permissions at an OS level for network per app, as you would be able to do if you had root access. I have no idea why regular Android distros don't allow you to do this, it seems like a really sensible thing to expose in app settings given the permissions model of Android.

[rconti]

Of course you do, your comment is just clickbait. Here's why:

| I don't actually see this as a problem

Okay, go on, perhaps you have an interesting point

| and instead it's a PSA everyone needs to internalize

If it's not a problem, it's not a PSA because nobody needs to know or care. If it's something worthy of a PSA, then it must stem from a problem.

[tsukikage]

Also: if you are not paying the service provider for the service, you are not their customer - you are their product.

[nemomarx]

If you do pay for a subscription, how can you be sure you're still not the product? What stops them from double dipping here?

[loudmax]

If you're paying for a subscription, the company might sell your data. If you're using a commercial service for free, they are certainly selling your data.

Having said that, you're right to be suspicious of commercial services, even that you pay for. Someone can found a startup with a strong commitment to customer privacy and the best of intentions, but a few acquisitions or near bankruptcies later, those commitments will go out the window.

[nemomarx]

Relevant to this case, since they have a free version and premium one, they would probably just sell data from both sets of customers. It would be leaving money on the table otherwise, right?

The small chance that they might go out of their way to not sell premium users data doesn't seem worth much.

[nozzlegear]

Flo isn't free though, you have to pay a weekly/yearly subscription to use it.

[boesboes]

that is a really fucked up view

[defrost]

Less a f-u-view, more a f-u-world, the above is pragmatic advice about the actual IRL challenges of keeping data secure.

Further, a view that ignores many real world digital data risks faced by those considered to be useful targets; eg: compromised supply chains delivering "pre hacked" hardware with discreet wifi chips or hidden out of band comms, etc.

[dspillett]

Nah. A healthy view when dealing with the fucked up situation that is modern life.

[vachina]

You can use a networked device, but make sure the data is stored somewhere you control (and own).